Hi all,
fixed in assp 2.2.2 build 13090:
- some email address and domain matchings were not working like expected
for some entry variants
- denySMTPConnectionsFrom was not working
- it was possible that large mails (above 10-15 MB) were not transfered -
such mails are now no longer queued for
the post checks (DKIM, Plugins level 2, charset/TNEF conversions)
- if more than one mail was transfered in one session, the second and next
mails have not got any score for bad helo's checks
changed:
The function for the following IP address lists is changed / enhanced:
whiteListedIPs, noBlockingIPs, noDelay, denySMTPConnectionsFrom,
noProcessingIPs
To define IP\'s only for specific email addresses or domains
(recipients) you must use the file:... option
An entry (line) may look as follows:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
It is possible to define a predefined group on any or both sides of the
'=>' separator, like:
[ipgroup]=>[usergroup]|user@...
NOTICE: the following combination of two entries, will lead in to an
user/domain based matching - the global entry will be ignored!
145.146.0.0/16 # comment
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
If multiple user/domain based entries are defined for the same IP, only
the last one will be used!
If an user/domain based entry is defined, the IP will be no longer
...listed unless the SMTP-command 'RCPT TO' is finished
(and a match is found).
So - for example - if you has whitelisted an IP to skip the early HELO
check - and you change it now to be user/domain based - the early HELO
check will be no longer skipped for this IP!
The function for the following email address/domain lists is changed /
enhanced:
blackListedDomains, whiteListedDomains
It is possible to make email addresses blacklisted only for a set of
local domains and/or local users.
Use wildcards (* and ?) to define domains.
Use the following syntax to do this:
*@anydomain=>*@any_local_domain - for domain to domain
*@*.anydomain=>*@any_local_domain - for any sub-domain to domain
user@...=>*@*.any_local_domain - for user to any sub-domain
It is possible to define more than one entry at the left and the right
side of the definition (=>), like:
*@anydomain|*@other_domain=>*@any_local_domain|*@other_local_domain -
always separate multiple entries by pipes
It is also possible to use a GroupDefinition in any or both sides, like:
[sendergroup]=>[recipientgroup]
[sendergroup1]|[sendergroup2]|*@domain=>[recipientgroup1]|[recipientgroup2]|user@...
NOTICE - that the local email addresses and domains are not checked to
be local once
Thomas
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Hi all,
a new special test build 13089 is available at SF-CVS
http://assp.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/assp/assp2/test/assp.zip
The following IP address lists supports now the enhanced syntax
'senderIP=>recipient'
'whiteListedIPs'
'noDelay'
'noProcessingIPs'
'denySMTPConnectionsFrom
'noBlockingIPs'
The following address/domain lists supports now the enhanced syntax
'sender=>recipient'
'whiteListedDomains'
'blackListedDomains'
Thomas
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Michael,
this is what I expect.
if you whitelist a local domain or address, the new code assumes you mean:
*@*=>mike@...
In case , the old code should have ignored this entry!
Thomas
Von: Michael Thomas <mike@...>
An: ASSP development mailing list <assp-test@...>,
Datum: 30.03.2013 02:49
Betreff: [Assp-test] whitedomains.txt issue
Thomas,
Tried X-Assp-Version: 2.2.2(13086) and found the following issue.
I had not upgraded whitedomains.txt to the new capability of specifying
the white listed sender(s) and valid recipient(s). The whitedomains.txt
was the old style with one white listed sender per line followed by a
comment, which in my case is always the domain that requested the white
listing. As in:
mike@...#xxxxxxxx.com
Yes, for a particular customer, my email address was white listed in
whitedomains.txt.
I received a spam message, in which mike@... was the recipient
and the sender was F29EF431@...
ASSP white listed the message as:
X-Assp-Whitelisted: Yes (whiteListedDomains 'mike@...')
Message should not have been white listed. There seems to be some
confusion between sender and recipient. Possibly instigated by the
comment.
--
Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-687-3300
Toll Free: 1-877-MATHBOX (1-877-628-4269)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own the Future-Intel(R) Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013
Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest. Compete
for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game on Steam.
$5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes. Submit your demo
by 6/6/13. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/12124-176961-30367-2
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Thomas,
Tried X-Assp-Version: 2.2.2(13086) and found the following issue.
I had not upgraded whitedomains.txt to the new capability of specifying
the white listed sender(s) and valid recipient(s). The whitedomains.txt
was the old style with one white listed sender per line followed by a
comment, which in my case is always the domain that requested the white
listing. As in:
mike@...#xxxxxxxx.com
Yes, for a particular customer, my email address was white listed in
whitedomains.txt.
I received a spam message, in which mike@... was the recipient
and the sender was F29EF431@...
ASSP white listed the message as:
X-Assp-Whitelisted: Yes (whiteListedDomains 'mike@...')
Message should not have been white listed. There seems to be some
confusion between sender and recipient. Possibly instigated by the comment.
--
Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-687-3300
Toll Free: 1-877-MATHBOX (1-877-628-4269)

Hello,
This week I tried migrating ASSP 2 to mysql on a solaris X86 system. For
this I had to recompile a new perl version is 64 bit (5.16) for assp to be
able to use the libmysqlclient which was compiled in 64 bit. Everithing ok,
all modules updated on the new perl install and when started assp V2 latest
I started consuming a lot of RAM and eventually eating all ram in the
system. I was forced on going back to ASSP 1.98 (latest few days ago. I
observe taht in V1 not many files can be stored in mysql , but more when
compleing mysql for spamdb rebuildspamdb creates a file named mysql and not
importing anything in the database.
Someoane has a clue to any or both of these problems?
--
________________________________________
Cu stima/Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Chirana-Gheorghita Eugeniu-Theodor
Bucharest, Romania
e-mail : office@...
mobile: 0743 698721
0747 447675

MessageScoring is already set to Blocking .
MessageScoring Upper Limit is set to 45 , so with a bayesian 500 the local email should be blocked,
(I set bayslocalValencePB 500)
As I can remember this was working with older ASSP versions , now it's not more working (no block)
Graziano
> ASSP development mailing list <assp-test@...>
> schreibt:
>> I am intentionally sending from server messages with a spam message ,
>> however ASSP is not blocking it , even if scoring is 500 .
>
> set it to "blocking", scoring will block it if you check
> "MessageScoringLocal"
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Own the Future-Intel&reg; Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013
> Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest.
> Compete for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game
> on Steam. $5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes.
> Submit your demo by 6/6/13. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel_levelupd2d
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-test mailing list
> Assp-test@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
>

ASSP development mailing list <assp-test@...>
schreibt:
>I am intentionally sending from server messages with a spam message ,
>however ASSP is not blocking it , even if scoring is 500 .
set it to "blocking", scoring will block it if you check
"MessageScoringLocal"

New TEST build 13086 is released.
fixed:
- group definitions at the left side of the '=>' separator, were not
resolved correctly
- if multiple group definitons were used in on line , only the last one
was shown in the GUI
http://assp.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/assp/assp2/test/assp.zip
Thomas
Von: Thomas Eckardt <Thomas.Eckardt@...>
An: "ASSP development mailing list" <assp-test@...>,
Datum: 25.03.2013 18:14
Betreff: [Assp-test] someone wants to try the new IP -> user
matching feature ?
Hi all,
is there some, who wants to try the following:
'whiteListedIPs','Whitelisted IPs*'
'They contribute to the Whitelist and to Notspam. For example:
145.145.145.145|146.145.|146.145.0.0/16. It is recommended to use the CIDR
notation.
To define IP\'s only for specific email addresses or domains
(recipients) you must use the file:... option
An entry (line) may look as follows:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
It is possible to define a predefined group on any or both sides of the
\'=>\' separator, like:
[ipgroup]=>[usergroup]|user@...
NOTICE: the following combination of two entries, will lead in to a
user/domain based matching - the global entry will be ignored!
145.146.0.0/16 # comment
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
If multiple user/domain based entries are defined for the same IP, only
the last one will be used!
---------------------------
This temporary build 13084 contains also a fix for the not matching
'@domain.tld' problem (spamlovers/emailAdminis ....).
How ever, the changes are related to major functions and features, which
requires a pre-test before this build could be released for all members of
the test list.
Don't worry - this build is still running on my production system without
any problem for some hours now.
NOTICE: If an user/domain based entry is defined, the IP will be no longer
whitelisted unless the SMTP-command 'RCPT TO' is finished (and a match is
found).
So - for example - if you has whitelisted an IP to skip the early HELO
check - and you change it now to be user/domain based - the early HELO
check will be no longer skippedfor this IP!
The download is available at:
http://assp.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/assp/assp2/test/assp.zip
Thomas
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Is anyone else having SSL issues on 13080 and above?
On 3/22/2013 7:09 PM, Scott MacLean wrote:
> When I installed build 13080, I had a few people complain of SMTP
> timeouts when sending mail. I also saw a timeout or two on my own mail
> client when sending mail, but it was very intermittent, so I didn't
> think anything of it.
>
> I installed build 13081 today, and everything seemed fine. At around 4
> pm today, out of the blue, ASSP started dropping SSL connections on port
> 465. Submission ports 587 and 25 worked just fine.
>
> Establishing a connection to ASSP on port 465 worked (the connection was
> accepted), but as soon as the SSL negotiation started, ASSP dropped the
> connection. This is obviously what was happening yesterday on build
> 13080 as well, as the error displayed was exactly the same.
>
> When this occurs, NOTHING is logged in the ASSP log. There is no
> indication whatsoever that a connection was attempted.
>
> I did some testing - I did a telnet to port 465. The connection was
> accepted, but nothing was logged. As soon as I typed a single character,
> ASSP dropped the connection.
>
> I tried stopping and restarting ASSP, it still did not accept any SSL
> submissions. I tried reverting to build 13080, this did not fix it. I
> thought perhaps there was something going on with OpenSSL, so I rebooted
> the server entirely. Once the server came up, it accepted an SSL
> connection and I was able to send a message, three times. The fourth
> time, it dropped the connection again, and at that point would drop
> every attempted SSL connection.
>
> I reverted to build 13056, and the problems have disappeared - I see
> lots of messages being submitted via SSL once more.
>
> So it would appear something has broken SSL in the new builds, at least
> on my server?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-test mailing list
> Assp-test@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

Thomas,
Thank you.
Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-687-3300
Toll Free: 1-877-MATHBOX (1-877-628-4269)
On 3/25/2013 2:52 PM, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
>> Because in the first example, only *@local.domain2 would be used to
>
> Yes, Michael.
>
> Maybe this will be possible in future - the problem is, that the still
> finished, parsed and compiled regex from the first line could not be
> changed if the second entry is processed.
> I would use a group - like
>
> [iptolocaldomains1]
> *@local.domain1
> *@local.domain2
> ....
> *@local.domain9
>
> and
>
> 145.146.0.0/16=>[iptolocaldomains1]
>
> The advantage is, that - and this will be happen if it works - if the such
> way useable IP-lists will be expanded, you can use the group again.
>
> eg:
> noprocessingIPs
>
> 201.14.0.0/16=>[iptolocaldomains1]
>
> Now, if you add an new domain to the group [iptolocaldomains1] - the
> whitelistedIPs and the noprocessingIPs will be changed
>
> The code changes for this feature are very generic - IHMO a single code
> line is required for each IP-list to enable the privacy - like
>
> 'whiteListedIPs' => 'PRWLIPRE'
>
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
> Von: Michael Thomas <mike@...>
> An: assp-test@...,
> Datum: 25.03.2013 19:29
> Betreff: Re: [Assp-test] someone wants to try the new IP -> user
> matching feature ?
>
>
>
> Thomas,
>
> If I correctly understand, the following:
> 145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain1
> 145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain2
>
> Should be coded as:
> 145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain1|*@local.domain2
>
> Because in the first example, only *@local.domain2 would be used to
> process the message.
>
> Michael Thomas
> Mathbox
> 978-687-3300
> Toll Free: 1-877-MATHBOX (1-877-628-4269)
>
> On 3/25/2013 1:12 PM, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
>> NOTICE: the following combination of two entries, will lead in to a
>> user/domain based matching - the global entry will be ignored!
>> 145.146.0.0/16 # comment
>> 145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain #
> comment
>> If multiple user/domain based entries are defined for the same IP,
> only
>> the last one will be used!
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-test mailing list
> Assp-test@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
>
>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER:
> *******************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
> privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
>
> individual to whom it is addressed.
> This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
> known virus in this email!
> *******************************************************
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-test mailing list
> Assp-test@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
>

>Because in the first example, only *@local.domain2 would be used to
Yes, Michael.
Maybe this will be possible in future - the problem is, that the still
finished, parsed and compiled regex from the first line could not be
changed if the second entry is processed.
I would use a group - like
[iptolocaldomains1]
*@local.domain1
*@local.domain2
....
*@local.domain9
and
145.146.0.0/16=>[iptolocaldomains1]
The advantage is, that - and this will be happen if it works - if the such
way useable IP-lists will be expanded, you can use the group again.
eg:
noprocessingIPs
201.14.0.0/16=>[iptolocaldomains1]
Now, if you add an new domain to the group [iptolocaldomains1] - the
whitelistedIPs and the noprocessingIPs will be changed
The code changes for this feature are very generic - IHMO a single code
line is required for each IP-list to enable the privacy - like
'whiteListedIPs' => 'PRWLIPRE'
Thomas
Von: Michael Thomas <mike@...>
An: assp-test@...,
Datum: 25.03.2013 19:29
Betreff: Re: [Assp-test] someone wants to try the new IP -> user
matching feature ?
Thomas,
If I correctly understand, the following:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain1
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain2
Should be coded as:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain1|*@local.domain2
Because in the first example, only *@local.domain2 would be used to
process the message.
Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-687-3300
Toll Free: 1-877-MATHBOX (1-877-628-4269)
On 3/25/2013 1:12 PM, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
> NOTICE: the following combination of two entries, will lead in to a
> user/domain based matching - the global entry will be ignored!
> 145.146.0.0/16 # comment
> 145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain #
comment
> If multiple user/domain based entries are defined for the same IP,
only
> the last one will be used!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Thomas,
If I correctly understand, the following:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain1
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain2
Should be coded as:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain1|*@local.domain2
Because in the first example, only *@local.domain2 would be used to
process the message.
Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-687-3300
Toll Free: 1-877-MATHBOX (1-877-628-4269)
On 3/25/2013 1:12 PM, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
> NOTICE: the following combination of two entries, will lead in to a
> user/domain based matching - the global entry will be ignored!
> 145.146.0.0/16 # comment
> 145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
> If multiple user/domain based entries are defined for the same IP, only
> the last one will be used!

Hi all,
is there some, who wants to try the following:
'whiteListedIPs','Whitelisted IPs*'
'They contribute to the Whitelist and to Notspam. For example:
145.145.145.145|146.145.|146.145.0.0/16. It is recommended to use the CIDR
notation.
To define IP\'s only for specific email addresses or domains
(recipients) you must use the file:... option
An entry (line) may look as follows:
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
It is possible to define a predefined group on any or both sides of the
\'=>\' separator, like:
[ipgroup]=>[usergroup]|user@...
NOTICE: the following combination of two entries, will lead in to a
user/domain based matching - the global entry will be ignored!
145.146.0.0/16 # comment
145.146.0.0/16=>*@local.domain|user@...|user2@*.mydomain # comment
If multiple user/domain based entries are defined for the same IP, only
the last one will be used!
---------------------------
This temporary build 13084 contains also a fix for the not matching
'@domain.tld' problem (spamlovers/emailAdminis ....).
How ever, the changes are related to major functions and features, which
requires a pre-test before this build could be released for all members of
the test list.
Don't worry - this build is still running on my production system without
any problem for some hours now.
NOTICE: If an user/domain based entry is defined, the IP will be no longer
whitelisted unless the SMTP-command 'RCPT TO' is finished (and a match is
found).
So - for example - if you has whitelisted an IP to skip the early HELO
check - and you change it now to be user/domain based - the early HELO
check will be no longer skippedfor this IP!
The download is available at:
http://assp.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/assp/assp2/test/assp.zip
Thomas
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Was the sender detected as emailAdmin ? The log should show it.
Thomas
Von: Doug Lytle <support@...>
An: ASSP Test <assp-test@...>,
Datum: 25.03.2013 11:49
Betreff: [Assp-test] Block report
Specifying the number of days as an Administrator for a block report
isn't working under ASSP version 2.2.2(13082). I did the following:
Sent email to ASSP
Subject line blank
Body of message in format:
source=>destination=>1
This generated a block report for 'source' for 5 days. It should have
only generated a 1 day report.
Doug
--
Ben Franklin quote:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

Specifying the number of days as an Administrator for a block report
isn't working under ASSP version 2.2.2(13082). I did the following:
Sent email to ASSP
Subject line blank
Body of message in format:
source=>destination=>1
This generated a block report for 'source' for 5 days. It should have
only generated a 1 day report.
Doug
--
Ben Franklin quote:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Michael wrote:
> I recently noticed that the settings for spamlover are ignored.
I'm seeing this as well, as of ASSP version 2.2.2(13081) (Ubuntu 12.04)
I've noted that 13082 is out there, will put it into place to see if it
fixes the issue
Doug
--
Ben Franklin quote:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."